Investment property…Coastal vs. Escondido

[sdsurfer]

[quote=ctr70]I wouldn’t buy anything to “break-even”. Why would you buy an investment to “break-even” and “hope” for appreciation with all the work and risk it takes to own rental property? Even if it does appreciate, to “realize” that appreciation and sell you pay a ton of taxes and costs anyway leaving you with 60 cents on the dollar of that appreciation. Yes you could 1031X and defer taxes, but that often happens at market peaks and you buy into another inflated property and you are forced to rush (I have heard of more horror stories of investors doing 1031X vs. just selling and paying the tax and depreciation recapture.) If you put 20% down & get a loan shoot for making $300+ per month TRUE positive cash flow after mortgage+taxes+insurance+vacancy+repairs+credit loss, etc…

I agree with sdrealtor & kingside that small condos in good locations with low hoas look good. Condo prices have fallen further than SFR’s so the numbers can be better AND the locations are much better.

The SFR’s tend to not pencil that well in SD County and you have to buy a major fixer “disaster” in a rougher “C” neighborhood (like the flippers do) to get a below market deal. Those are 50-90 year old houses that require a lot of fix are likely a lot of maintenance over the years. What might work is if you found a SFR with a variance with an extra in-law unit to juice the cash flow numbers. SFR’s also makes your cash investment higher because you have 20% down + another big chunk of change to fix it up. The condos many times need almost no fix work & they are less expensive so the 20% down is less. So your out of pocket is less. There are plenty of condos that are finance-able.

For units you have to go into rougher areas to make the numbers work, “C” neighborhoods. The numbers for units don’t work well even B neighborhoods in SD, certainly not A neighborhoods. Most of the units will be very old maintenance intense properties too. And you have to pay the water bill (vs. tenant pays it SFR and hoa pays it in a condo). It’s one thing to own a SFR in a rough neighborhood b/c SFR will always get a better tenant even in a rougher hood. But you have to make sure you have the stomach for managing units in rougher areas. There could be lots of turnover and credit loss.

SFR’s in Inland Empire CA, Phoenix, Vegas do pencil well and properties are much newer. Just have to be real picky in neighborhoods. And the worry is can you keep them rented?

I would definitely manage a property myself if it is a SFR and only in Escondido and I lived in Encinitas. It is not that hard. And you save so much on cash flow over the years. I manage myself a SFR rental I own in another state and it’s not that big of a deal. I have probably saved $10,000+ in property management costs over the last 7 or so years. The main thing you need is a couple of really good local handymen you can call if something breaks. Do the tenant screening and leasing all yourself. There’s no fertilizer like a farmers shadow:)[/quote]
Thanks for the encouragement. I do believe I could manage a property very well. I actually know a lot of property managers in the industry I’m in and I’ve learned a lot from them. Of course there are always those horror stories, but lots of good ones too. It should would be nice if all the tenants were like I’ve been over the years to my landlords! I was actually talking to a lender friend over the weekend that mentioned 3.75% on investment property for a 15 year loan. I’ll take the 300 a month in the meantime, but that is encouraging as well as pretty much in line with what I’m thinking because then even if I end up with some repairs and a little vacancy, which I will of course try to avoid, then I’m still in the positive and have a property that will generate more income down the road and pay itself off eventually. Thanks for sharing your insight! Much appreciated.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdsurfer]Is this in San Diego? I guess I live a pretty sheltered life up in North County.[/quote]

Yes, but it was more than twenty years ago that I sold. SD does not have these same problems today due to community policing policies. North County is/was not immune from property and other crimes. Some pockets of the entire county have more crime than others. Open and notorious drug sales and prostitution in SD County are way down from 20 years ago, though.

I am really not averse to owning rental property at all. If I had the $$, I wouldn’t mind purchasing a nice mid-century rental house for about $265K within walking distance from me (near dtn Chula Vista) and manage it myself. For what you get (excellent pier and post construction and “oversize lot”), these properties are now priced very reasonably, IMO. The type of families these houses attract are local and very stable with many family ties in the immediate area. However, I would prefer to pay all cash and just use the rental income to supplement my retirement income.

My old rental(s) were five minutes from 32nd Street Naval Station. These small communities of SD have been significantly cleaned up since then.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdsurfer]Is this in San Diego? I guess I live a pretty sheltered life up in North County.[/quote]

Yes, but it was more than twenty years ago that I sold. SD does not have these same problems today due to community policing policies. North County is/was not immune from property and other crimes. Some pockets of the entire county have more crime than others. Open and notorious drug sales and prostitution in SD County are way down from 20 years ago, though.

I am really not averse to owning rental property at all. If I had the $$, I wouldn’t mind purchasing a nice mid-century rental house for about $265K within walking distance from me (near dtn Chula Vista) and manage it myself. For what you get (excellent pier and post construction and “oversize lot”), these properties are now priced very reasonably, IMO. The type of families these houses attract are local and very stable with many family ties in the immediate area. However, I would prefer to pay all cash and just use the rental income to supplement my retirement income.

My old rental(s) were five minutes from 32nd Street Naval Station. These small communities of SD have been significantly cleaned up since then.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdsurfer]Is this in San Diego? I guess I live a pretty sheltered life up in North County.[/quote]

Yes, but it was more than twenty years ago that I sold. SD does not have these same problems today due to community policing policies. North County is/was not immune from property and other crimes. Some pockets of the entire county have more crime than others. Open and notorious drug sales and prostitution in SD County are way down from 20 years ago, though.

I am really not averse to owning rental property at all. If I had the $$, I wouldn’t mind purchasing a nice mid-century rental house for about $265K within walking distance from me (near dtn Chula Vista) and manage it myself. For what you get (excellent pier and post construction and “oversize lot”), these properties are now priced very reasonably, IMO. The type of families these houses attract are local and very stable with many family ties in the immediate area. However, I would prefer to pay all cash and just use the rental income to supplement my retirement income.

My old rental(s) were five minutes from 32nd Street Naval Station. These small communities of SD have been significantly cleaned up since then.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdsurfer]Is this in San Diego? I guess I live a pretty sheltered life up in North County.[/quote]

Yes, but it was more than twenty years ago that I sold. SD does not have these same problems today due to community policing policies. North County is/was not immune from property and other crimes. Some pockets of the entire county have more crime than others. Open and notorious drug sales and prostitution in SD County are way down from 20 years ago, though.

I am really not averse to owning rental property at all. If I had the $$, I wouldn’t mind purchasing a nice mid-century rental house for about $265K within walking distance from me (near dtn Chula Vista) and manage it myself. For what you get (excellent pier and post construction and “oversize lot”), these properties are now priced very reasonably, IMO. The type of families these houses attract are local and very stable with many family ties in the immediate area. However, I would prefer to pay all cash and just use the rental income to supplement my retirement income.

My old rental(s) were five minutes from 32nd Street Naval Station. These small communities of SD have been significantly cleaned up since then.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdsurfer]Is this in San Diego? I guess I live a pretty sheltered life up in North County.[/quote]

Yes, but it was more than twenty years ago that I sold. SD does not have these same problems today due to community policing policies. North County is/was not immune from property and other crimes. Some pockets of the entire county have more crime than others. Open and notorious drug sales and prostitution in SD County are way down from 20 years ago, though.

I am really not averse to owning rental property at all. If I had the $$, I wouldn’t mind purchasing a nice mid-century rental house for about $265K within walking distance from me (near dtn Chula Vista) and manage it myself. For what you get (excellent pier and post construction and “oversize lot”), these properties are now priced very reasonably, IMO. The type of families these houses attract are local and very stable with many family ties in the immediate area. However, I would prefer to pay all cash and just use the rental income to supplement my retirement income.

My old rental(s) were five minutes from 32nd Street Naval Station. These small communities of SD have been significantly cleaned up since then.

[bearishgurl]

I would not consider 91910 a “C” area (as ctr70 was discussing above). I would consider it an “A” or “B” area, depending on type of house and location.

[bearishgurl]

I would not consider 91910 a “C” area (as ctr70 was discussing above). I would consider it an “A” or “B” area, depending on type of house and location.

[bearishgurl]

I would not consider 91910 a “C” area (as ctr70 was discussing above). I would consider it an “A” or “B” area, depending on type of house and location.

[bearishgurl]

I would not consider 91910 a “C” area (as ctr70 was discussing above). I would consider it an “A” or “B” area, depending on type of house and location.

[bearishgurl]

I would not consider 91910 a “C” area (as ctr70 was discussing above). I would consider it an “A” or “B” area, depending on type of house and location.

[ctr70]

I also think it is a myth that the average retail buyer can waltz out there and buy something 20% below market off the MLS with his Realtor. From what I see in the market, there are really only 2 sources of true under market deals: 1. Trustee sale auctions (all cash), 2. Major fixer disasters that mostly the flippers buy with hard money or cash.

Most retail MLS buyers getting mortgages to buy even if they spend a ton of time looking and make a lot of offers will likely pay 95% or more of market. A big mistake many make is buying a “fixer upper” that needs $30k in fix for only $30k less than the similar fixed up house, thinking they are getting a deal. Why not just buy the clean one and save yourself all the work! And finance the costs of fix up done by someone else at 4% for 30 years vs. paying it out of your pocket. Now if you get it $60k under market and it needs $20k fix, that is getting better.

Berishgirl, thanks for the info on your rental across the vacant lot. That is a good warning, you can’t be too careful with location. But I still do not see the logic and where the ROI is on a $265k 70 year old house that gets $1,600 in rent:) Break that out for me. Now a $100k house that gets $1,250 in rent, that is more like it.

[ctr70]

I also think it is a myth that the average retail buyer can waltz out there and buy something 20% below market off the MLS with his Realtor. From what I see in the market, there are really only 2 sources of true under market deals: 1. Trustee sale auctions (all cash), 2. Major fixer disasters that mostly the flippers buy with hard money or cash.

Most retail MLS buyers getting mortgages to buy even if they spend a ton of time looking and make a lot of offers will likely pay 95% or more of market. A big mistake many make is buying a “fixer upper” that needs $30k in fix for only $30k less than the similar fixed up house, thinking they are getting a deal. Why not just buy the clean one and save yourself all the work! And finance the costs of fix up done by someone else at 4% for 30 years vs. paying it out of your pocket. Now if you get it $60k under market and it needs $20k fix, that is getting better.

Berishgirl, thanks for the info on your rental across the vacant lot. That is a good warning, you can’t be too careful with location. But I still do not see the logic and where the ROI is on a $265k 70 year old house that gets $1,600 in rent:) Break that out for me. Now a $100k house that gets $1,250 in rent, that is more like it.

[ctr70]

I also think it is a myth that the average retail buyer can waltz out there and buy something 20% below market off the MLS with his Realtor. From what I see in the market, there are really only 2 sources of true under market deals: 1. Trustee sale auctions (all cash), 2. Major fixer disasters that mostly the flippers buy with hard money or cash.

Most retail MLS buyers getting mortgages to buy even if they spend a ton of time looking and make a lot of offers will likely pay 95% or more of market. A big mistake many make is buying a “fixer upper” that needs $30k in fix for only $30k less than the similar fixed up house, thinking they are getting a deal. Why not just buy the clean one and save yourself all the work! And finance the costs of fix up done by someone else at 4% for 30 years vs. paying it out of your pocket. Now if you get it $60k under market and it needs $20k fix, that is getting better.

Berishgirl, thanks for the info on your rental across the vacant lot. That is a good warning, you can’t be too careful with location. But I still do not see the logic and where the ROI is on a $265k 70 year old house that gets $1,600 in rent:) Break that out for me. Now a $100k house that gets $1,250 in rent, that is more like it.

[ctr70]

I also think it is a myth that the average retail buyer can waltz out there and buy something 20% below market off the MLS with his Realtor. From what I see in the market, there are really only 2 sources of true under market deals: 1. Trustee sale auctions (all cash), 2. Major fixer disasters that mostly the flippers buy with hard money or cash.

Most retail MLS buyers getting mortgages to buy even if they spend a ton of time looking and make a lot of offers will likely pay 95% or more of market. A big mistake many make is buying a “fixer upper” that needs $30k in fix for only $30k less than the similar fixed up house, thinking they are getting a deal. Why not just buy the clean one and save yourself all the work! And finance the costs of fix up done by someone else at 4% for 30 years vs. paying it out of your pocket. Now if you get it $60k under market and it needs $20k fix, that is getting better.

Berishgirl, thanks for the info on your rental across the vacant lot. That is a good warning, you can’t be too careful with location. But I still do not see the logic and where the ROI is on a $265k 70 year old house that gets $1,600 in rent:) Break that out for me. Now a $100k house that gets $1,250 in rent, that is more like it.

[Author]

Posts